Tag Archives: Larry Kudlow

Norquist and Kudlow have finally proven they are strident liberals

Donkey Hotey (CC)

Donkey Hotey (CC)

While Washington has in recent weeks been pondering what to do about illegal aliens, a number of pseudoconservatives have recently(and finally) outed themselves as strident liberals after decades of pretending to be conservatives.

They are: ATR President Grover Norquist, CNBC host Larry Kudlow, and NH Senator Kelly Ayotte.

There was plenty of evidence even before their jump on the amnesty bandwagon that they are not conservatives. This was especially true of Norquist, who has advocated (and continues to advocate) appeasing Islamists, implementing Sharia in the US, deep defense cuts, isolationism, and protecting tax loopholes for Washington lobbyists that contribute significantly to the deficit problem and allow rich liberals like Warren Buffett to pay little to nothing in taxes.

Ayotte, for her part, has advocated killing the crucial MEADS missile defense system and succeeded in cutting the Air Force’s airlifter fleet.

And now, we have both of them advocate for amnesty for 12-20 million illegal immigrants.

They falsely claim that immigration, per se, is good for America, and that illegal aliens should be legalized because, well, everyone in America except the Indians is an immigration or descendant of immigrants. In other words, Republicans should reward lawlessness.

Not only will this reward lawbreaking and make legal immigrants – and those currently waiting for an immigration visa to the US – look like fools, it will also alienate the vast majority of Republican voters, sending the GOP to the dustbin of history.

And worst of all, amnesty will create 12-20 mn new Democratic voters, by putting illegal aliens on a pathway to citizenship within no less than 5 years. If that happens, there will never again be a Republican President or Congressional majority. And you can take that to the bank and cash a check on it.

Don’t believe me? Let’s do simple math.

Let’s assume, conservatively, that there are 12 mn illegal aliens in the US, and that if legalized, they’ll be voting Republican in George W. Bush numbers (44%).

OK, now the math:

44% * 12 mn = 5.28 mn new GOP voters

56% *  12 mn =  6.72 mn new Dem voters:

Net gain: 1.44 mn new voters for the Democrats.

So even under the most optimistic assumptions, if amnesty is passed, the Democrats will gain, on net, 1.44 mn more voters than Republicans – strengthening the Dem majority even further and forever making the GOP a minority party. The two major parties will be the Nancy Pelosi Democratic Party and the Ed Markey Democratic Party.

Rand Paul – another pseudoconservative who has jumped on the amnesty bandwagon – falsely claims that Republicans must win California back and that supporting amnesty will help the GOP do so. He falsely claims California is winnable and its citizens want the same thing as other Americans – lower taxes, lower government spending, balanced budgets, etc.

Actually, California is permanently, irrevocably lost to the GOP, and it’s precisely because of uncontrolled immigration – legal and illegal. California is actually a textbook reason why amnesty MUST be defeated at all costs.

Massive immigration, both legal and illegal, but mostly legal, has transformed California from a Republican bastion into such a liberal state that no Republican, moderate or conservative, can get elected statewide in California anymore. Not so long ago, this state gave America such great Republican Senators and Governors as Richard Nixon, S. I. Hayakawa, Ronald Reagan, and Pete Wilson.

Between 1952 and 1988, California voted Republican in every presidential election except in 1964.

But since 1988, it has become a stridently liberal state where fewer than 30% of voters are Republicans.

What’s worse, the vast majority of Californians WANT Big Government, high taxes, and high government spending. They’ve passed  an anti-business cap-and-tax system and stringest “fuel efficiency” standards. Their state is highly unionized. In 2010, they rejected proposals to suspend cap-and-tax until the unemployment rate drops, and last year, they elected a State Senate Democratic SUPERMAJORITY, allowing the Democrats – who already control the State Assembly and the Governorship – to raise taxes without limits.

As a result, productive citizens and businesses are fleeing the state en masse. The few who remain yet are being taxed to death. Those who remain in California are predominantly welfare moochers, government employees, union thugs, gangsters, and members of extremely leftist organizations.

This is what the ENTIRE country will look like if amnesty becomes law. If it does, the entire country will have the electorate of California. AND THERE WILL BE NO TURNING BACK.

It will actually be worse, because millions of voters will desert the GOP for supporting amnesty and thus rewarding lawbreaking.

The GOP will then be unable to even maintain 41 seats in the US Senate.

Thanks to Republicans’ repeated betrayals of American workers and selling out to K-Street bundlers, the GOP already has enough problems cobbling together an electoral majority.

California and New Mexico are lost forever to the GOP. Colorado, Virginia, and Florida haven’t voted Republican since 2004. Republicans can barely defend Arizona these days. Only Texas remains secure – for now.

If Texas goes, America goes.

Capitulate on illegal immigration, and there goes Texas, the entire Southwest, Florida, Virginia, and there goes the presidency, forever.

And what policies will these illegal aliens – whom the Rubio-McCain-Rand amnesty will turn into 12 mn new Democrat voters – support?

A Big Government and an even bigger welfare state with higher taxes and higher government spending.

Successive polling by the Pew Research Center and other polling organizations shows that Hispanics, by overwhelimng majorities, suport such policies, including a “bigger government with more” over a “smaller government with fewer services”; and that the vast majority of Hispanics trusts the federal gov to “do the right thing” “always” or “almost always”.

No amount of “voter education” will conver these voters to conservatism, because people are unwilling to give up their political beliefs. You can’t convert a Latino-American socialist from Mexico or Argentina to conservatism any more than you can convince an Islamist to give up on jihad or North Korea to give up on Kimilsungism (juche).

Have you ever wondered why most Latin American countries have socialist governments? Because the vast majority of their citizens are socialists. And by importing them to the US, you’re only going to make the US another socialist country. People’s political beliefs don’t change simply because they step onto American soil.

(Similarly, French socialists have, for decades, been importing millions of poorly educated, unskilled, socialist-minded Arab immigrants into France, knowing full well that this will eventually create an unbeatable socialist majority in France. But unlike the US, French rightwingers actually fight fiercely against this scheme; rightwing President Nicolas Sarkozy was particularly tough on immigration, deporting illegals and cutting even legal immigration levels by half.

Who are the real surrender monkeys here: the French or the citizens and politicians of this country?)

For those who still believe socialist Hispanic voters are winnable, I say: Look at the majoritzy of Hispanic families.

They’re headed by single mothers, without a father in the home. Their children are educated at taxpayers’ expense K-12 and receive Pell Grants and student aid.

For food, there are foodstamps.

If mom works, she gets the Earned Income Tax Credit which keeps her below the income tax treshold. If she doesn’t work, she receives 99 weeks of unemployment benefits and other welfare checks.

For healthcare, there’s Medicaid and Obamacare.

In other words, the majority of Hispanic (and black) families are totally dependent on the federal government – from birth to adult life to the grave.

Yes, we all know a few Hispanic families who aren’t dependent on the federal government and who are hard-working, productive, God-fearing, and perhaps even conservative. But they are very few in number. The vast majority of Hispanic families fit the description above.

A typical Hispanic woman far more likely than white women to become pregnant out of wedlock and be a single mother. Her children are far more likely than white children to be fatherless, do poorly in school, drop out of high school, be unemployed, commit crime, and end up in prison.

Why should these people – who depend on the federal government for their livelihoods – vote for a party that pledges to cut taxes they don’t pay and to reduce the government programs they depend on and live off, instead of the party that pledges to let them keep what they already get and to give them more?

Especially in today’s world, where the vast majority of voters in all countries are interested only in getting more from others – preferrably for “free” – and forcing others to pay the bill?

“But we must pass amnesty to appeal to Hispanics, or we will never win another election!”, you will say.

That’s nonsense. Republicans don’t need to. Republicans instead need to appeal better to white voters – especially women and Hispanics. And passing amnesty will only infuriate these voters. Especially traditional Republican voters.

As Byron York has shown, using Nate Silver’s highly accurate election result forecasting model, even if Romney were to win 70% of the Hispanic vote last year, he would STILL have lost the presidential election. Even with 70% of the Hispanic vote.

Romney lost because too few white voters supported him – and because blacks, eager to defend Obama turned out in even greater numbers than in 2008, and in even greater numbers than whites did.

Obama’s incumbency and Hurricane Sandy also certainly played a role. Before Sandy, Gallup had Romney ahead of Obama by 5 points; after Sandy hit the East Coast, Romney’s margin dwindled to just 1 point, and eventually, Romney lost the popular vote in addition to the EC vote.

Nate Silver’s model shows that Romney would’ve needed to win 73% of the Hispanic vote – a share that NO ONE in US history has won, not even Barack Obama – to win the 2012 election.

Even Barack Obama has never won 73% of the Hispanic vote: in 2008, he won 67%, and last year, he won 71%. But never 73%. And the notion that any Republican, even an amnesty supporter or a Hispanic like Rubio, can ever win 73% of the Hispanic vote, is ridiculous. Nobody in US history, not even Barack Obama, has achieved this.

But, as Nate Silver’s model shows, had only 4% more of white voters backed Romney, he would’ve won the election.

Last but not least, as one Latina has recently pointed out in the Mediaite, amnesty will utterly fail to win Republicans new Hispanic votes, because Hispanics don’t care about immigration. Their top issues are jobs, the economy, education, and the budget deficit – NOT immigration. And many of them probably don’t want a new influx of cheap illegal alien workers competing with legal Hispanic immigrants for jobs.

A legal Hispanic kitchen maid earning 10 dollars/hour will probably not appreciate new illegal alien workers competing with her for a 5 dollar/hour salary.

Because that is why Republicans are really pushing for amnesty: their K-Street bundlers want to bring in even more, even cheaper, foreign workers to displace American and legal immigrant workers.

Employers love to hire illegal immigrants, as they can pay these people less and also evade all federal and state employment laws.

It’s the business lobby and the two major parties against the American people. Like Timothy Carney points out, it’s K Street against Main Street.

To sum up, Republicans lost last year due to a number of factors, but Hispanic voters were not one of them. They were still only 8% of the electorate. Trying to please Hispanic voters with amnesty will utterly fail; on the contrary, it will create, on net, millions of new Democratic voters who will send the GOP to the graveyard.

If amnesty becomes law, these illegal immigrants will become US citizens and will give the Dems a permanent, unbeatable majority. The entire country will have the electorate of California – and there will be no turning back. And to see how well that works out, just look at California.

Gov. Scott Walker Will Survive

Gov. Scott Walker's Political Career Will Be Decided June 5th

On June 5th, the battle will be over.  Will citizens of the Badger State vote to keep their ongoing prosperity or revert back to the old policies that drained the state of economic vigor?  Currently, the massive multi-billion dollar budget deficit has been balanced, unemployment is down, and property taxes have decreased for the first time in over ten years.  Hence, the reason why Gov. Scott Walker has maintained a healthy lead over his Democratic challenger, Milwaukee mayor, Tom Barrett.   This will mark the second time unions have tried to alter the balance of power in Madison.  The first being the $35 million dollar state senate recall election last summer that saw Republicans maintain control of the chamber.   After all mainstream media coverage and the protesting inside the capitol, the results of that election were the very definition of anti-climatic. Now, with this effort to oust Gov. Walker himself, I expect the same result, but with far more political ramifications.

DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz has called this recall election a “dry run” for Obama come November.

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN: If the Republican governor should retain his seat up there, what will it say about the power of unions who have been fighting him and what will it say about putting Wisconsin in play this fall?

REP. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Well, I am going there Tuesday to campaign with Mayor Barrett. I think that he has a real opportunity to win. We have put our considerable grassroots resources behind him. All of the Obama for America and state party resources, our grassroots network is fully…

CROWLEY: But are there national implications?

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: … engaged. And — well, I think what’s going to happen is that because of our on-the-ground operation, we have had an opportunity in this election, because especially given that Wisconsin is a battleground state, just like we did in the recall elections a year ago, to give this a test run.

And so what I think the implications will be is that ultimately I think Tom Barrett will pull this out, but regardless it has given the Obama for America operation an opportunity to do…

CROWLEY: Test run it.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: … the dry run that we need of our massive, significant, dynamic grassroots presidential campaign, which can’t really be matched by the Romney campaign or the Republicans because they’ve ignored on the ground operations.

I think Ms. Schultz and the rest of the institutional left are going to be disappointed this coming Tuesday.   Radio host Tony Katz gave his insight, and took down former Sen. Byron Dorgan in the process, into the absurdity surrounding this recall.  Stating how this “dry run” is costing the Wisconsin taxpayer another $20 million dollars and how Walker’s fiscal reforms are exactly what America is yearning  for in this anemic economic recovery thanks to the Obama administration. However, let’s see why the far left thinks Gov. Scott Walker is so evil.

 

Well, he attacked the parasitic relationship between government and public sector unions and curbed their collective bargaining rights.  That sounds scary,  but as Peter Ferrara wrote in The American Spectator, it was solely directed towards salary negotiations.  It didn’t touch benefits or safety regulations and rules.  It gave the local county governments the buffer it needed to maximize efficiency and curb deficits without laying off workers or putting the distribution of state services at risk.  How much of a difference would that make?

According to Ferrera, “since Walker’s reforms removed benefits from collective bargaining, government employers were freed to turn to competitive bidding on the open market, where many have found their coverage at substantially reduced costs. For school districts so far, the savings from this competitive bidding alone have amounted to $211.47 per student. Statewide that would add up to nearly $200 million in savings.”

This new economic elasticity derived from Gov. Walker’s reforms has benefited the Wisconsin taxpayer in other ways.  Indeed, “the state has also used this flexibility to halt fraudulent sick leave abuses that unions used to inflate overtime expenses. Workers had called in sick for their own shifts, and then worked the next shift on overtime pay. School districts have also been freed to pay teachers based on performance and not just seniority, and to keep better performing teachers rather than longer term time servers who have long given up caring about their job performance.”  Now we know why teachers were so irate.  After all, interjecting competition into a cartel, which is what a union is at its heart, inevitably leads to dissolution and “what a shame that would be for our children.”

Gov. Scott Walker also decided to put the lid on the cookie jar.  As Chris Christie has done in New Jersey, he made public employee unions contribute more to their pensions and health care plans.  Unlike what unionized labor may tell you, the contributions are beyond modest.  Ferrera writes:

After all the yelling and screaming in Wisconsin, in the end these government workers were only required to contribute 5.8% of their salaries towards their pensions, which is matched by their government employers (taxpayers), and 12.6% of the costs of their health insurance, with the other 87% paid by taxpayers. This compares to private sector workers paying on average 21% of the cost of their company health insurance, with most private sector workers having no pension at all.

The state budget reforms also made payment of union dues voluntary for government workers, empowering these workers to each decide for themselves if they want to be full dues paying members of the public employee unions. That is a potential savings for families of $1,000 a year for each government worker in the family. This forces the public unions to focus on serving their members and convincing each one that their services are worth the dues, just like every other private sector institution in American society.

After seeing union leadership blow $35 million in a state senate recall election, I WOULD HOPE those employees would be ecstatic seeing their dues be spent responsibly, or better yet, opted to keep more of their hard earned money.  In conclusion, the results have been “disastrous.”  A whopping $1 billion in savings in the first year alone with not one one cent raised in taxes to balance the budget.

Concerning property taxes, an issue that forced my family to flee New Jersey, the rates have fallen for the first time in twelve years. According to the Wall Street Journal:

the property tax bill for the median home fell by 0.4% in 2011, as reported by Wisconsin’s municipalities. Property taxes, which are the state’s largest revenue source and mainly fund K-12 schools, have risen every year since 1998—by 43% overall. The state budget office estimates that the typical homeowner’s bill would be some $700 higher without Mr. Walker’s collective-bargaining overhaul and budget cuts.

The median home value did fall in 2011, by about 2.3%, which no doubt influenced the slight downward trend. But then values also fell in 2009 and 2010, by similar amounts, and the state’s take from the average taxpayer still climbed by 2.1% and 1.5%, respectively. In absolute terms homeowners won’t see large dollar benefits year over year, but any hold-the-line tax respite is both rare and welcome in this age of ever-expanding government.

The real gains will grow as local school districts continue repairing and rationalizing their budgets using the tools Mr. Walker gave them. Those include the ability to renegotiate perk-filled teacher contracts and requiring government workers to contribute more than 0% to their pensions. A year ago amid their sit-ins and other protests, the unions said such policies would lead to the decline and fall of civilization, but the only things that are falling are tax collections.

As the new jobs report showed we only added 69,000 jobs last May and prompting the unemployment rate to go up to 8.2%, Wisconsin has seen its level of unemployment fall below the national average.  As Jason L. Riley of the Wall Street Journal wrote, “Wisconsin’s unemployment rate is 6.7%…according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the state added more than 23,000 jobs last year. And a recent survey found that Wisconsin employers were eager to hire—an indication that Mr. Walker’s policies have made the state more business-friendly.”

With unemployment down, property taxes at its lowest in over a decade, a $3.6 billion dollar budget deficit completely wipe out, and $1 billion in savings; I  hope the smart Wisconsin voter would know who to vote for and who saved them from economic catastrophe.  That narrative has gained traction with Gov. Scott Walker leading Democratic Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett 52%-45%.  The far left and some elements in the mainstream media have tried to put forth this “war on workers” narrative aimed at Gov. Scott Walker and conservatives. That is grossly, spectacularly, and demonstratively wrong.  We’re freeing union workers to make decisions with their own finances.  As a result, union membership has dropped, not due to belligerent smashing tactics, but because it removed the coercive nature of union dues and membership.  As Investors Business Daily aptly noted, it’s really big labor vs. taxpayers in this fight.  Big labor being a cornerstone of support for a particular left-leaning party and its effete leader who currently occupies the White House.  In all, these reforms:

 Together…ensure that unions can’t deliver much in the way of economic benefits, and they give workers a way to respond accordingly. They present workers with an easy choice: When dues don’t buy you anything and they compete with the cable bill, why pay them? So it’s no surprise that the unions now appear to be losing members — and, of course, money. According to the Wall Street Journal, membership in the Wisconsin branch of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees fell from 62,818 last March to 28,745 this February

That’s a good thing. This isn’t a war on workers, but a liberation of them.  This isn’t the fall of Wisconsin, but the resurrection of it.  I’m confident Gov. Scott Walker will remain the state’s chief executive and thereby vindicating his agenda.  In the process, hopefully, giving unionized labor the knock out punch that leads to the day where the American taxpayer can celebrate in their final destruction.  This is a test run madame chairwoman and I expect it will be the harbinger that lifts our nominee to the White House and initiate a Wisconsinite reform of Washington D.C come January 2013.

(h/t Tony Katz)